Professionalism is White Supremacy, Actually
Shockingly, the workplace standards created by white men are hostile to employees of color
Think of a white-collar professional. I’m willing to bet that the image that comes to mind is a well-groomed white man wearing a pressed suit. I know this not just because of my own learned bias, but because the above photograph is the first result for “professional” on the popular image hosting website, Unsplash.
“Professional” is a euphemism for “white”.
Similarly, “white supremacy” invokes a specific mental picture. But white supremacy doesn’t necessarily involve clan hats. It’s often more banal than that. Here, I mean it as the elevation of whiteness above all else.
With many of us returning to the office, the veil of remote work lifted, and conversations about “quiet quitting” (i.e., doing your job and going home), it’s time to reexamine what workplace professionalism really means. I’ll give you a hint: “professional” is a euphemism for “white”.
The status quo
Professionalism not only encourages but necessarily requires that we follow the status quo. And that status quo is a reflection of our late-capitalist, patriarchal, and racist society. It was created for and by white men, and it loathes individuality. We must be placed in neat boxes labeled with our race, gender, and other markers for inspection. Our “success” (market value) hinges on the results.
Is it really a surprise, then, that this unspoken test is harmful to people of color?
Looking the part
Protective hairstyles, like Bantu knots and locs to keep hair away from the face, are common for people with Afro-textured hair. But historically, for Black employees to find acceptance in the workplace, they have to adopt hairstyles that mimic textural straightness.
While some states are considering instituting the CROWN (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair) Act, which explicitly prohibits discrimination against protective hairstyles, it’s already been shot down by conservatives in Florida. Opponents claim that hair is implicitly included in existing anti-discrimination laws. It’s not.
The move to remote work changed explicit dress codes. Now, even companies in the notably stuffy financial sector favor “business casual”. But the lack of racial diversity in the workplace sets an unspoken standard to adhere to Western styles.
These issues meet at the intersection of class and race, where white Americans still hold a majority of the country’s wealth.
Cultural fit
In her UCLA Law Review essay about workplace professionalism, Leah Goodridge discusses the harassment she has faced as a Black attorney. Although Goodridge repeatedly raised concerns about day-to-day microaggressions, her discomfort was ignored. She was even told that she needed to be a “team player” (i.e., prioritize the feelings of white colleagues) in order to be a cultural fit.
As a consequence of increased scrutiny following the #MeToo movement in 2019, at least 20 high-profile CEOs who were perpetrators of, or complicit in, company-wide abuse have been explicitly outed. But even the “good” ones like Dan Price of Gravity Payments, who went viral for cutting his generous million-dollar salary, has stepped down as CEO after a decade of sexual abuse allegations caught up with him. Did a lack of professionalism (i.e., its dictionary definition of respectfulness and grace) hinder the upward mobility of CEOs, a majority of which were white men?
Good English
From our strange, non-standardized grammatical rules (“‘i’ before ‘e’, except after ‘c’” and except for the words “neighbor”, “weird”, “science”, etc.) to the fact that the following is grammatically correct: “the pizza I had had had had no slices”, English is a difficult language to learn. The professional adage “use proper grammar” is a barrier for non-native speakers.
There’s also the matter of pronunciation. For native American English speakers, I encourage you to try this exercise: say the word “roar”. Notice how your tongue is bunched up and positioned towards the back of your mouth? That’s called a rhotic ‘r’, and it’s not found in any other language on Earth. While European languages… Unsurprisingly, non-native English speakers sometimes have accents (who knew!). Some speech pathologists prey upon vulnerable non-native speakers by offering accent coaching, which places the burden of change on prospective employees and not the discriminatory practices of employers (like this Linkedin ad).
To be taken seriously in a professional setting, people of color often have to code-switch.
Even native speakers face pressure to conform to Standard American English (SAE). To be taken seriously in a professional setting, people of color often have to code-switch, or navigate between their natural dialect to a more “acceptable” one. Specifically, Black employees who use African American Vernacular English (AAVE). What speech pathologists consider a unique dialect, or even language, has a rich, complex history (see: this excellent article by linguist Chi Luu), but is considered “unprofessional” language when compared to SAE.
Hello, my name is…
Yes, even names may be considered unprofessional. While a preference for “white” names like Beth and Brendan may not be written in a company guide, there exists an implicit bias.
This prejudice is most evident in the recruitment stage, before people of color can even get a foot in the proverbial door. From traditionally-Black names to non-English names that are “difficult to pronounce”, people of color have a proven disadvantage. A 2021 study from the University of California-Berkeley found, with a sample of 83,000 applications, that between two similarly qualified applicants, the Black job seeker was 10% less likely to be contacted for an interview.
The solution
Aside from the anecdotal, there is no evidence that suggests, let alone definitively proves, that diversity training “works”. While the Black Lives Matter Movement inspired companies to launch anti-racist campaigns with their newfound “commitment to diversity”, corporate leadership is still staggeringly, overwhelmingly white.
The obvious solution, then, is for companies to diversify team leadership. Because “diversity” isn’t just a buzzword for soulless corporations — it is a moral prerogative.
The less obvious and equally out-of-reach solution is to dismantle the systems of power that inspired diversity training in the first place.
